On 9/8, I submitted the following letter to the New York Times. The NYT rejected it.
In a recent op-ed, Representative Mike Turner called for the U.S. to “invest” in new nuclear weapons. He was wrong to do so.
Firstly, the U.S. and Russia together already possess more than ten thousand nuclear warheads, enough to destroy life on earth and several other earth-sized planets. We need desperately to divest from nuclear weapons, not “invest” in them.
Secondly, “investing” in a new nuclear triad will cost the U.S. taxpayer $2 trillion. The most likely return on “investment” is nuclear winter and mass death.
Thirdly, America’s current arsenal, especially the Navy’s Trident submarine force, is extremely potent, highly survivable, and more than sufficient to deter any enemy.
At the height of the Cold War, I served in Cheyenne Mountain. As a young Air Force lieutenant, I witnessed a simulated nuclear attack on the U.S. by the Soviet Union. Even on the primitive monitors we had back in 1986, seeing Soviet missile tracks terminating at American cities was unforgettable.
We must stop building genocidal nuclear weapons. We must instead renew international efforts and treaties to downsize these dreadful and dangerous arsenals. Spending yet more trillions on more world-shattering nukes is worse than a mistake—it’s a crime against humanity.
They've never published any of my letters, either, Bill. And they reject my comments from time to time, as well, especially when I'm critical of NYT editorial policy. ; )
Doesn't detract from the relevance and the truth of your statements!
"Yet certain 'experts' seemingly want it to escalate to World War III with nukes."
I don't think anyone wants an escalation, and I do note your "seemingly" qualifier, Bill. But I think it's a matter of sheer hubris. The people making the policy decisions believe themselves to be the ones with a lock on infallible judgment. They're so sure of themselves, they don't see what they're doing as gambling, which is REALLY scary.
I made reference to Doctor Strangelove yesterday - and by implication his mad partner, General Jack Ripper with his mine shaft gap. But even more than the theoreticians of the age of MAD - who spoke in terms of multiple layers of deterrence while having a first strike plan in reserve; we now have academics and military 'leaders' believing and advocating for the concept of winnable nuclear wars (basically escalate to de-escalate). And with the end-times fervor of some Christian and Israeli religious sects in positions of influence, we are in an extremely perilous time.
Cheyenne Mountain. Too bad you couldn't have taken pictures and shown us taxpayers what we paid for (sarc). I guess that where Congress and the President will go if there is a nuclear war. It figures. In the Western canon the Government always survives even if the populace dies. In the book "Fail Safe" a computer error causes a group of U.S. bombers to be given the order to attack Moscow. In spite of best efforts by both sides one bomber gets through and nukes Moscow. As penance, the US agrees to nukes one of our cities, but the city chosen is NYC rather than Washington, D.C. as you might suspect it would be. The President endures suffering because his wife is shopping there but at least the government is safe. For some reason you never see "Fail Safe" on TV, even though the movie is highly rated. I wonder why that is??
I just checked Amazon and Fail Safe is there for anyone interested, but I think you are referring to the movie not being on "broadcast" commercial TV?
Henry Fonda was such a solid President in the movie. Hey! What if we had had Henry Fonda for President rather than Ronald Reagan? As for losing the wife shopping...the end of capitalism! That's almost as scary as losing NYC. Seriously, can anyone imagine a movie of that kind being made today? And I use that word intentionally - too serious for today when we are all told when we purchase something: "enjoy!"
Alex: I believe I heard "Fail Safe" was based on JFK, and his Wife shopping was Jackie. Not as successful as Dr. Strangelove, in the Box Office, but critically it was...! Very similar to Dr. Strangelove, so much so that I heard plaigiarism Lawsuits were filed back then.
I wouldn't doubt it. Strangelove has moments of farce. Fail Safe doesn't. In the 2017 Putin Interviews Oliver Stone gets Putin to watch Strangelove. Then he gives him the DVD in the case. Except the case is empty. Putin opens it and says, humerously, "Typical American gift".
Ha, ha, ha... Robert Kraft Owner of the NE New England Patriots NFL Football Team once let Putin try on one of his World Championship Rings when visiting the US Putin never gave it back thinking it was a "Gift" It was not Kraft said!!! True story.
I remember that. I recall that Kraft basically said he's welcome to it. Big Power Politics. Out of my league. I don't have a Super Bowl ring in any case.
Back in the day our Big Oil company sent a company jet and an exec to the Soviet Union to do an oil deal. One of the pilots had his own calculator. He was told to keep it on the jet. Apparently they didn't want their own pilots getting jealous. Another time a college friend went to the SU as a high school student. He and a friend were admitted to an otherwise closed restaurant. The first thing the waiter did was offer to buy the shirt off his back. Tales from the USSR.
Early this year, the members of the board of the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists kept the Doomsday Clock at 23:58:30, just 90 seconds to midnight where it was set the previous year. They haven't changed it yet, but given the current situation I would be inclined to advance the Doomsday Clock to 23:59:59, just about one second to midnight. https://wrknight.substack.com/p/235959
It's established that WW3 was averted during the Cuban Missile Crisis when a Soviet officer kept a nuclear tipped torpedo from being launched though the command had been given to do so. It's worth noting that the one who issued the command to launch said essentially, "we will all die, but all of them will die with us"
This should be kept in mind when we hear of anyone saying what you wrote of being said, that the Russian bluff can be called because surely they won't commit suicide.
The critical thing about nuclear weapons is that they are the Great Leveler. It doesn't matter that one side has more warheads, more modern delivery vehicles, more megatons to throw. It means The End. When one has enjoyed unchallenged conventional power for a very long time it is easy to think that all will continue as it has to date. What empire didn't think this? At least historically, empires could convince themselves that in a disastrous war the tide could always turn. Sometimes that would happen but eventually, inevitably, it would not. Now we have no waiting, no tide that can turn, no ark that can ride out the flood of death.
We have a guarantee of a very quick ending with no winners, a loss to all humanity and without a single conventional battle needing to being fought between nuclear powers. But we still have fools who insist that one side can come out of a nuclear war better than the other. The thought that "we can prevail" dies hard in the powerful.
I am not the one to look to for hope. It will happen as surely as the lust for power / the practice of war is an integral part of being human. We have been extraordinarily lucky in the nuclear age, this does not seem to be appreciated, nor does it seem to bother the powerful that in the next and last episode of world war, we will take down most of the marvelous variety of life on Earth with us, which we are already destroying piecemeal, not even giving that a thought.
And whatever you or I think, it doesn't matter. Entire countries that never had a thought to get nuclear weapons will go down with those who took to them, the mighty US in the lead and still champion, as they say in sports.
When I did my "Penal Servitude" for SAC Strategic Air Command, USAF 73-77 I was Serving all 3 "Sky-Cop" (we carried 38 Revolvers & M-16's. 12 Gauge Shotguns too)-- areas of operation & security: Base Security, Convoys (Nuclear Weapons), Runways (the B-52's. "BUFFS"), and the Missile Fields (MInuteman MIRVS} It was interesting to say the least. I actually touched them the Warheads, and been in the Cockpits of B-52's. The Pilots some were younger than the Buffs that they flew! We patrolled the Flight Lines & Missile Fields too... I can't see how the Fixed Site ICBM's are still relevant myself. When in I was talking to one Major Missile Combat Crew member in our LCF (Launch Control Facility) below ground where they stayed. He had a Top Secret Clearance and said their missiles targeted China & the Soviet Union, and if we were ever defeated some were even targeted for the LCF's. LCC's, (Launch Control Centers) where we were on Duty in order to keep the weapons systems from going to the enemy. Not sure if he was pulling my leg on that last pt. Sometimes Warrant Officer's who needed Flight time to keep their flying pay would take us up in their Helicopters to check the Missile Sites too. "Peace Is Our Profession" Our Motto.... With regards to the NYT I hope you cancelled your Subscription. :/ :o) What I remember most was our returning from Vietnam "Sky Cops" They were Untouchable-- still got to wear their "Jungle Boots" "Jungle Fatigues" & Berets even though they were now back in the World as "Shorttimers" lol Always Chirping Short, short, short on their Radio's. Telling us all about the Re-up Birds & Fuck -U Lizards in SE Asia!
I recall seeing blue USAF vans driving out to the Titan sites around Tucson (1970-73), perhaps they were doing what you did starting in '73 or maybe it was simply shift changing. Your comment about the targets makes me wonder who are the people deciding these things? In the Titan control room I believe there were two officers each armed and sitting beyond reach but within full sight of each other. They were to simultaneously turn keys, one for each, to enable a launch so that a "madman" alone could not cause a launch.
But here is the part I find most interesting, if one of them refused to do the job, the other was authorized to shoot to kill. Where is insanity in this scenario? Is the man insane who suddenly thinks he cannot kill hundreds of thousands of fellow human beings and refuses to do it, or is the man insane who will kill his fellow man for refusing mass murder? The answer is easily given by officialdom - the man who refuses mass murder is insane and must fear his own death to insure he does his job.
Clif : Yes this was the SAC "2-Man Policy", and that was true! I was in Minuteman Missiles not Titans they were an older ICBM Vehicle though when I was Appointed a City Firefighter I found a brother Firefighter who also worked Titans in the Mid-West and we commiserated. Our Un-Official Motto in SAC was: "To Err is Human To Forgive is Not SAC Policy" lols Our Missile Combat Crew was also 2 Missileers carrying snub- nosed 38 Revolvers. We worked Top-Side in the LCF, they were subterranean in the LCC (Launch Control Center), and we stayed in the Field (of Missiles) for 3 days straight when On-Duty!
I worked for Radio Shack at the time and the manager of the store was a former Titan crew member. A more meek and mild and pleasant a guy nobody could hope to find, but willing to turn the key.
For the first time in history, on 26 September, 3 hypersonic missiles were allegedly fired at 1 target. Russia's Kinzhals were targeting an alleged F-16 bunker at an airfield in Starokostiantyniv. There's no confirmation of success, but 4 more Kinzhals hit targets in the same area the following day. That $70 million missile cost shows Russia's determination to prevent an escalation in the war i.e., to prevent long-range Western missiles being fired at it. It doubles as warning, in tandem with the recent change in its nuclear response rules, that it can strike Europe. Dangerous times. The difference in brinkmanship and idiocy is result.
Sending F16's is the craziest idea. Russia rules the sky and neophyte Ukrainian pilots going up in a few F16's would quickly result in no F16's. Some experienced Western pilots could take them up, but that would just sacrifice them, too. I propose sending Victoria Nuland up in one and Hillary in another as they laid the groundwork for this insanity.
Plus Boris Johnson told Zelensky the West would keep him safe from the Azov nationalists in the capital. Otherwise we would leave him to the wolves. At that point Zelensky should have just left the country with his millions rather than be complicit in the destruction of Ukraine. IMHO
Thanks, Ray. The MSM isn't calling. In fact, I submitted an Op-ed and a Letter to the Editor to the New York Times in response to a recent op-ed from a Congressman calling for more nukes.
On 9/8, I submitted the following letter to the New York Times. The NYT rejected it.
In a recent op-ed, Representative Mike Turner called for the U.S. to “invest” in new nuclear weapons. He was wrong to do so.
Firstly, the U.S. and Russia together already possess more than ten thousand nuclear warheads, enough to destroy life on earth and several other earth-sized planets. We need desperately to divest from nuclear weapons, not “invest” in them.
Secondly, “investing” in a new nuclear triad will cost the U.S. taxpayer $2 trillion. The most likely return on “investment” is nuclear winter and mass death.
Thirdly, America’s current arsenal, especially the Navy’s Trident submarine force, is extremely potent, highly survivable, and more than sufficient to deter any enemy.
At the height of the Cold War, I served in Cheyenne Mountain. As a young Air Force lieutenant, I witnessed a simulated nuclear attack on the U.S. by the Soviet Union. Even on the primitive monitors we had back in 1986, seeing Soviet missile tracks terminating at American cities was unforgettable.
We must stop building genocidal nuclear weapons. We must instead renew international efforts and treaties to downsize these dreadful and dangerous arsenals. Spending yet more trillions on more world-shattering nukes is worse than a mistake—it’s a crime against humanity.
They've never published any of my letters, either, Bill. And they reject my comments from time to time, as well, especially when I'm critical of NYT editorial policy. ; )
Doesn't detract from the relevance and the truth of your statements!
It seems well-reasoned. I can see why they wouldn't publish it. No sense in giving space to the other side of the discussion.
Your experience supports my view that the slogan of the NYT is actually "all the news that's fit to wrap fish."
"All the news that fits our views".
I'd guess you were banned because of the Neo-Nazi reference. You're not supposed to say that, Ray.
Yet Western Media were reporting on Ukraine's Nazi's before Russia invaded - the hypocrisy.
"Yet certain 'experts' seemingly want it to escalate to World War III with nukes."
I don't think anyone wants an escalation, and I do note your "seemingly" qualifier, Bill. But I think it's a matter of sheer hubris. The people making the policy decisions believe themselves to be the ones with a lock on infallible judgment. They're so sure of themselves, they don't see what they're doing as gambling, which is REALLY scary.
High on their own supply--and they control the nukes. Yes, it's scary.
I made reference to Doctor Strangelove yesterday - and by implication his mad partner, General Jack Ripper with his mine shaft gap. But even more than the theoreticians of the age of MAD - who spoke in terms of multiple layers of deterrence while having a first strike plan in reserve; we now have academics and military 'leaders' believing and advocating for the concept of winnable nuclear wars (basically escalate to de-escalate). And with the end-times fervor of some Christian and Israeli religious sects in positions of influence, we are in an extremely perilous time.
Our species deserves extinction. Dogs and horses don’t.
....or any other non-human creatures.
Of course. But I spoke up for dogs and horses because they are the most domesticated.
Personally I don't think our species deserves extinction. But we do deserve a lot better class of leaders.
We have only misleaders. The real leaders are assassinated by “lone gunmen” (working for the CIA).
Not me. Not this crowd.
Very WELL said, Jazzme. Thank You for sharing those thoughts and convictions.
Cheyenne Mountain. Too bad you couldn't have taken pictures and shown us taxpayers what we paid for (sarc). I guess that where Congress and the President will go if there is a nuclear war. It figures. In the Western canon the Government always survives even if the populace dies. In the book "Fail Safe" a computer error causes a group of U.S. bombers to be given the order to attack Moscow. In spite of best efforts by both sides one bomber gets through and nukes Moscow. As penance, the US agrees to nukes one of our cities, but the city chosen is NYC rather than Washington, D.C. as you might suspect it would be. The President endures suffering because his wife is shopping there but at least the government is safe. For some reason you never see "Fail Safe" on TV, even though the movie is highly rated. I wonder why that is??
I just checked Amazon and Fail Safe is there for anyone interested, but I think you are referring to the movie not being on "broadcast" commercial TV?
Henry Fonda was such a solid President in the movie. Hey! What if we had had Henry Fonda for President rather than Ronald Reagan? As for losing the wife shopping...the end of capitalism! That's almost as scary as losing NYC. Seriously, can anyone imagine a movie of that kind being made today? And I use that word intentionally - too serious for today when we are all told when we purchase something: "enjoy!"
Alex: I believe I heard "Fail Safe" was based on JFK, and his Wife shopping was Jackie. Not as successful as Dr. Strangelove, in the Box Office, but critically it was...! Very similar to Dr. Strangelove, so much so that I heard plaigiarism Lawsuits were filed back then.
I wouldn't doubt it. Strangelove has moments of farce. Fail Safe doesn't. In the 2017 Putin Interviews Oliver Stone gets Putin to watch Strangelove. Then he gives him the DVD in the case. Except the case is empty. Putin opens it and says, humerously, "Typical American gift".
Ha, ha, ha... Robert Kraft Owner of the NE New England Patriots NFL Football Team once let Putin try on one of his World Championship Rings when visiting the US Putin never gave it back thinking it was a "Gift" It was not Kraft said!!! True story.
I remember that. I recall that Kraft basically said he's welcome to it. Big Power Politics. Out of my league. I don't have a Super Bowl ring in any case.
Kraft that Fat-Ass Billionaire made Nice Rings more like a Sapphire & Diamond encrusted Ingot than Ring worth close to 6 Figures, or so...lol
Back in the day our Big Oil company sent a company jet and an exec to the Soviet Union to do an oil deal. One of the pilots had his own calculator. He was told to keep it on the jet. Apparently they didn't want their own pilots getting jealous. Another time a college friend went to the SU as a high school student. He and a friend were admitted to an otherwise closed restaurant. The first thing the waiter did was offer to buy the shirt off his back. Tales from the USSR.
Early this year, the members of the board of the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists kept the Doomsday Clock at 23:58:30, just 90 seconds to midnight where it was set the previous year. They haven't changed it yet, but given the current situation I would be inclined to advance the Doomsday Clock to 23:59:59, just about one second to midnight. https://wrknight.substack.com/p/235959
Good podcast. Maybe someday they'll discuss this stuff in one of those "debates" pundits like to talk about. But I'm not holding my breath.
It's established that WW3 was averted during the Cuban Missile Crisis when a Soviet officer kept a nuclear tipped torpedo from being launched though the command had been given to do so. It's worth noting that the one who issued the command to launch said essentially, "we will all die, but all of them will die with us"
This should be kept in mind when we hear of anyone saying what you wrote of being said, that the Russian bluff can be called because surely they won't commit suicide.
The critical thing about nuclear weapons is that they are the Great Leveler. It doesn't matter that one side has more warheads, more modern delivery vehicles, more megatons to throw. It means The End. When one has enjoyed unchallenged conventional power for a very long time it is easy to think that all will continue as it has to date. What empire didn't think this? At least historically, empires could convince themselves that in a disastrous war the tide could always turn. Sometimes that would happen but eventually, inevitably, it would not. Now we have no waiting, no tide that can turn, no ark that can ride out the flood of death.
We have a guarantee of a very quick ending with no winners, a loss to all humanity and without a single conventional battle needing to being fought between nuclear powers. But we still have fools who insist that one side can come out of a nuclear war better than the other. The thought that "we can prevail" dies hard in the powerful.
I am not the one to look to for hope. It will happen as surely as the lust for power / the practice of war is an integral part of being human. We have been extraordinarily lucky in the nuclear age, this does not seem to be appreciated, nor does it seem to bother the powerful that in the next and last episode of world war, we will take down most of the marvelous variety of life on Earth with us, which we are already destroying piecemeal, not even giving that a thought.
And whatever you or I think, it doesn't matter. Entire countries that never had a thought to get nuclear weapons will go down with those who took to them, the mighty US in the lead and still champion, as they say in sports.
Yes , but a Champion of Death is no Champion...!
No worries. Harris says she won't surrender: https://www.theamericanconservative.com/harris-describes-peace-plans-as-proposals-for-surrender-in-zelensky-meeting/
Trump is more equivocal: https://www.the eamericanconservative.com/trump-and-zelensky-meet-in-new-york/
Meanwhile, US strategy remains similar to the losing strategy of the Vietnam era: https://www.theamericanconservative.com/the-domino-theory-refuses-to-fall/
When I did my "Penal Servitude" for SAC Strategic Air Command, USAF 73-77 I was Serving all 3 "Sky-Cop" (we carried 38 Revolvers & M-16's. 12 Gauge Shotguns too)-- areas of operation & security: Base Security, Convoys (Nuclear Weapons), Runways (the B-52's. "BUFFS"), and the Missile Fields (MInuteman MIRVS} It was interesting to say the least. I actually touched them the Warheads, and been in the Cockpits of B-52's. The Pilots some were younger than the Buffs that they flew! We patrolled the Flight Lines & Missile Fields too... I can't see how the Fixed Site ICBM's are still relevant myself. When in I was talking to one Major Missile Combat Crew member in our LCF (Launch Control Facility) below ground where they stayed. He had a Top Secret Clearance and said their missiles targeted China & the Soviet Union, and if we were ever defeated some were even targeted for the LCF's. LCC's, (Launch Control Centers) where we were on Duty in order to keep the weapons systems from going to the enemy. Not sure if he was pulling my leg on that last pt. Sometimes Warrant Officer's who needed Flight time to keep their flying pay would take us up in their Helicopters to check the Missile Sites too. "Peace Is Our Profession" Our Motto.... With regards to the NYT I hope you cancelled your Subscription. :/ :o) What I remember most was our returning from Vietnam "Sky Cops" They were Untouchable-- still got to wear their "Jungle Boots" "Jungle Fatigues" & Berets even though they were now back in the World as "Shorttimers" lol Always Chirping Short, short, short on their Radio's. Telling us all about the Re-up Birds & Fuck -U Lizards in SE Asia!
If they show Zelensky autographing a nuclear warhead then I'll know it's time to panic.
I recall seeing blue USAF vans driving out to the Titan sites around Tucson (1970-73), perhaps they were doing what you did starting in '73 or maybe it was simply shift changing. Your comment about the targets makes me wonder who are the people deciding these things? In the Titan control room I believe there were two officers each armed and sitting beyond reach but within full sight of each other. They were to simultaneously turn keys, one for each, to enable a launch so that a "madman" alone could not cause a launch.
But here is the part I find most interesting, if one of them refused to do the job, the other was authorized to shoot to kill. Where is insanity in this scenario? Is the man insane who suddenly thinks he cannot kill hundreds of thousands of fellow human beings and refuses to do it, or is the man insane who will kill his fellow man for refusing mass murder? The answer is easily given by officialdom - the man who refuses mass murder is insane and must fear his own death to insure he does his job.
Clif : Yes this was the SAC "2-Man Policy", and that was true! I was in Minuteman Missiles not Titans they were an older ICBM Vehicle though when I was Appointed a City Firefighter I found a brother Firefighter who also worked Titans in the Mid-West and we commiserated. Our Un-Official Motto in SAC was: "To Err is Human To Forgive is Not SAC Policy" lols Our Missile Combat Crew was also 2 Missileers carrying snub- nosed 38 Revolvers. We worked Top-Side in the LCF, they were subterranean in the LCC (Launch Control Center), and we stayed in the Field (of Missiles) for 3 days straight when On-Duty!
I worked for Radio Shack at the time and the manager of the store was a former Titan crew member. A more meek and mild and pleasant a guy nobody could hope to find, but willing to turn the key.
Yes.., Duty, Honor, Country..!
For the first time in history, on 26 September, 3 hypersonic missiles were allegedly fired at 1 target. Russia's Kinzhals were targeting an alleged F-16 bunker at an airfield in Starokostiantyniv. There's no confirmation of success, but 4 more Kinzhals hit targets in the same area the following day. That $70 million missile cost shows Russia's determination to prevent an escalation in the war i.e., to prevent long-range Western missiles being fired at it. It doubles as warning, in tandem with the recent change in its nuclear response rules, that it can strike Europe. Dangerous times. The difference in brinkmanship and idiocy is result.
Sending F16's is the craziest idea. Russia rules the sky and neophyte Ukrainian pilots going up in a few F16's would quickly result in no F16's. Some experienced Western pilots could take them up, but that would just sacrifice them, too. I propose sending Victoria Nuland up in one and Hillary in another as they laid the groundwork for this insanity.
I like your choice of pilots.
How did Dr Oppenheimer put it?
"Now I Am Become Death, the Destroyer of Worlds."
The Story of that Infamous Quote : https://www.wired.com/story/manhattan-project-robert-oppenheimer/ .
I'm unable to find my present location listed in General Turgidsen's book of "World Targets in Mega-Deaths," but I'm not sleeping any better for it.
The MAD doctrine applied to large yield fusion weapons.
Tactical low yield weapons with reduced fallout do not apply to the MAD doctrine. Why would they be developed if not to be utilized?
Plus Boris Johnson told Zelensky the West would keep him safe from the Azov nationalists in the capital. Otherwise we would leave him to the wolves. At that point Zelensky should have just left the country with his millions rather than be complicit in the destruction of Ukraine. IMHO
Thanks, Ray. The MSM isn't calling. In fact, I submitted an Op-ed and a Letter to the Editor to the New York Times in response to a recent op-ed from a Congressman calling for more nukes.
Both my letter and op-ed were rejected.
"The idea of a divine creator belittles the elegant reality of the Universe." --Richard Dawkins